ArticlePeerJ2023
Giant, swimming mouths: oral dimensions of extant sharks do not accurately predict body size in
Article in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional anatomy, jaw mechanisms, and feeding behavior of Dunkleosteus terrelli (Placodermi, Arthrodira).Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007) · 2026Article
- Early gigantic lamniform marks the onset of mega-body size in modern shark evolution.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Cautionary tales on the use of proxies to estimate body size and form of extinct animals.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Reconstructing an ancient fish: Three-dimensional skeletal restoration of the head of Mawsonia (Sarcopterygii, Actinistia) using CT scan, and an adjusted model for body size estimation in fossil coelacanths.Journal of anatomy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The size of Results: Length estimates for Conclusions: Length estimates for arthrodires based on the mouth dimensions of extant sharks are not reliable. Arthrodires have proportionally larger mouths than sharks, more similar to catfishes (Siluriformes). The disproportionately large mouths of arthrodires suggest these animals may have consumed larger prey relative to their body size than extant macropredatory sharks, and thus the paleobiology and paleoecology of these two groups may not have been exactly analogous within their respective ecosystems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.